ReviewGels (Basel, Switzerland)2026
From ECM Aging to Mechanobiological Restoration: Injectable Fillers and Dermal Fibroblast Mechanotransduction-A Narrative Review.
Review in Gels (Basel, Switzerland), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Skin aging reflects the accumulation of molecular damage and a progressive disruption of dermal mechanical homeostasis. Fragmentation and disorganization of the dermal extracellular matrix (ECM) impair force transmission to resident fibroblasts. Reduced cell spreading and mechanical force generation are associated with increased matrix metalloproteinase expression and reduced collagen synthesis, partly through c-Jun/AP-1 activation and attenuation of TGF-β/TβRII signaling. Reduced YAP/TAZ mechanosignaling has also been linked to cGAS-STING-dependent senescence in experimental models. However, its causal role in aging human dermis remains unresolved. This narrative review considers dermal mechanobiology as an integrative framework alongside ultraviolet exposure, oxidative stress, glycation, and cellular senescence. It examines how injectable fillers may influence the dermal mechanical microenvironment. A filler's material properties may constitute a mechanical exposure, although bulk rheological measurements do not define force transmission at the cellular scale. Human in vivo studies of cross-linked hyaluronic acid provide the most direct evidence that enhanced structural support is associated with fibroblast spreading, activation of TGF-β-related signaling, and increased type I collagen deposition. Evidence for calcium hydroxylapatite and other biostimulatory fillers is complementary but more heterogeneous. A composite of PEGDE-cross-linked hyaluronic acid and calcium hydroxylapatite microspheres is considered as an explicitly preliminary example. This review defines the current evidence, its key limitations, and the mechanistically informed studies needed to determine whether, and which, fillers can meaningfully modify dermal mechanobiology.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.